Refugee repatriation
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•412 views
Refugee Repatriation- Decision making process (Lecture at UCT)
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Similar to Refugee repatriation
Similar to Refugee repatriation (20)
More from Sergio Carciotto
More from Sergio Carciotto (13)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Refugee repatriation
- 1. Refugee Repatriation: Decision-making process 05 APRIL 2016 LECTURE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN (UCT)
- 2. Outline of the presentation Part 1: Return Migration (definition; main theories and determinants) Part 2: Voluntary Repatriation as ‘durable solution’ Why migrants decide to go back? What does influence their decision- making process? Part 3: Case study: the case of Angolans refugees in South Africa Conclusions Questions
- 3. Part 1: Return Migration Return migration can be defined as “the movement of emigrants back to their homelands to resettle” (Gmelch 1980) Refugee Repatriation is a form of return migration The dichotomy between economic migrants and refugees are irrelevant Same determinants of return migration Individual choice & structural factors
- 4. Theories of return migration: an overview Neoclassical approach – focuses on labour migrants return is viewed as a failure New Economics of Labour Migration (NELM) – the focus is the household (importance of remittances) Structural Approach – return is about the context (i.e. expectations in the home countries) no links with the home countries Transnationalism – there are socio and economic and political links between sending and receiving country; ‘return’ is not the end of the ‘migration cycle’ Social network Theory – importance of ‘social capital’ as an incentive for return
- 5. New theoretical framework? 1. The interpretative framework need to be broadened to include different categories of people (economic migrants, refugees, returnees) 2. Regional movements and globalisation have created more opportunities for migrants and returnees 3. ‘Development’ (better transport, improved technology and better means of communication have increased the information flow and helped migrants to prepare their return) 4. All these elements require a new model to interpret ‘return migration’
- 6. New theoretical framework Cont. There are a number of factors to be taken into account: Voluntariness of repatriation Preparedness of the returnee (resource mobilization and information gathering) Social networks (existence of cross-border socio economic networks) provide information Length and type of migration
- 7. New theoretical framework Cont.
- 8. Summary Refugee repatriation is a form of ‘return migration’ No clear cut between categories – similar determinants for return migration Different theoretical frameworks (neoclassic, NELM, structural approach, social network, transnationalism) Migrants often live in between country of origin and destination/asylum and have multiple identities Propensity to return depends of preparation (readiness + resource mobilisation)
- 9. Part 2: Refugee Voluntary Repatriation and the Decision- Making Process Perception of threat, decision to flee, a period of extreme danger and flight; reaching safety; camp behaviour; repatriation, and resettlement Last three steps are considered ‘durable solutions’ Voluntary Repatriation (VR) is based on 3 elements: The right to return as human right enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 13(2) right to leave and right to rerun The right to return home should be free, voluntary and based on informed decision Should be done in a safe and dignified manner
- 10. Some questions 1. What are the reasons to refuse repatriation? 2. Why VR is so relevant? 3. Is return always possible or desirable? 4. Alternative forms of return?
- 11. Decision-making Process Return decisions are complex influenced by a series of structural determinants: • The length of time spent in the host country • Language barriers for refugee children born in exile (reintegration) • Deteriorated living conditions • Loss of income-generating activities • A politically hostile environment upon return • Safety in the country of origin • Lack of access to reliable information on the country of origin
- 12. Decision-making Process (cont.) 1. Combination of factors in the country of asylum and the country of origin 2. Refugees repatriate spontaneously 3. The geographical context also plays a pivotal role 4. Foremost are conditions in countries of asylum influence the decision of refugees to stay put or return 5. The need to return to a “normal life”
- 13. Summary Returns in post-war situations are similar (patterns, motivations) Often refugees return spontaneously Decision-making process is complex Often refugees do not want to go back and return is not an option Transnational returns further challenged the idea of return as static or something definitive Return is not the end of the migration cycle concept of “home” not only a physical environment but also a site of social relationship and cultural meanings Need to return to “normal life”
- 14. Thank You
Editor's Notes
- INTRO - There is often a strong emphasis on migrants and refugees coming in but we often tend to forget that migrants also return to their country of origin and sometime they even re-migrate – and RETURN is not necessary the END of the “migration cycle” ECONOMIC MIGRANTS (VOLUNTARY CHOICE) VS REFUGEES (FORCED DECISIONS) – this distinction is not real
- EVOLUTION OF THEORIES IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE DECIDE TO RETURN (theories are important but there is no one which fits all!!!) NEOCLASSICAL VIEW – migrant return because the project is failed NELM there is a link between the migrant and the sending country (if the spouse is in the sending country the migrant will be more likely to return) also skills acquired determine the likelihood to return home. Migration in not permanent but is a calculated strategy. Both Neoclassical and NELM have shortcomings as they are too focused on individual and less on structural constraints. Structural approach (return is about the socio-economic and political context back home). It is not only about the capital or the finance acquired abroad but also the social and cultural changes that have occurred while the person was away (more time = more changes). What are the opportunities in the country of origin??? What impact can they have??? There is also a process of readjustment to take into considerations - Migrants do not retain links with their country of origin. Transnationalism – migrants are attached to their home but also acquire a new identity abroad; importance of the diaspora (connecting to their own culture) transnational identities ------also a groups solidarity between migrants of the same ethnic group (mutual assistance) Return occurs when enough resources have been accumulated. –Tangible and intangible resources – returnee is a social actor part of social networks
- 3 reasons why is necessary to go beyond these models and explore new models of return migration
- Model suggested by Cassarino (early 2000) We can use this framework to interpret our case study The propensity for migrants to return is depends on their preparation. This requires 2 elements 1) Preparedness (not only as a voluntary act but also as a proof of readiness) and 2) resource mobilisation (include financial capital and social capital and information) This process require time!!! Importance of circumstances at home and in the host country
- Determinants of return migration (both individual choices and structural elements same as for the determinants of migration or why people move) MULTIPLE IDENTITIES (is difficult to confine them into categories also because they can move between categories and acquire different status across time)
- Commonly the life of a refugee can be divided according into the following stages: perception of threat, decision to flee, a period of extreme danger and flight; reaching safety; camp behaviour; repatriation, and resettlement (Stein 1981). Other durable solutions are local integration or resettlement
- Despite the fact that voluntary repatriation is considered as the best solution according to UNHCR (It is estimated that between 1992 and 2000 over 8 million refugees have repatriated) 1) a lot of people do not want to return why???….what states should do???? The fact of their wanting to return is taken for granted so their motivation for repatriating does not necessarily arise as a question 2) It become relevant because a) donors and funding agencies did not want to support programmes where refugees were in a protracted situations (camps) b) because hosting countries started to see refugees as a burden c) the link between migration and development promoted the return of refugees 3) no, is not always possible 4) ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF RETURN ARE TRANSNATIONAL RETURN – RETURN IS NOT OFTEN STATIC AND PERMANENT – there are also more sustainable forms of return maintaining links and relations with the country of origin and the country of asylum (network, remittances, diaspora) . This are based on dual residence and back and forth movements – connected with the idea of “home” and “identity” – challenge the traditional idea of voluntary return as a durable solution
- - LET’S LOOK AT WHAT INFLUENCE THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
- What makes return an interesting option is not only the conditions in the country of origin but rather a combination of factors occurring both in the country of asylum and in the country of origin Refugees repatriate spontaneously and without any assistance when conditions in their home countries improve, but also that self-repatriation movements might be caused by hostile socio-economic and environmental conditions in the country of asylum Refugees who are hosted in the ‘global north’ can access a wide range of civil, social and economic rights and have the opportunity to conduct employment and self-employment activities and this has a strong influence on their decision to return. Those who are living in less developed countries generally enjoy fewer socio-economic rights and are more inclined to repatriate It is more what happen in the county of asylum that make a difference in terms of decisions to return If they cannot return to a “normal life” = PROPER STANDARD OF LIVING< SOCIALITY AND STATUS AND SENSE OF BELONGING they will oppose repatriation
- HOME=physical environment but is also a site of social relationship and cultural meanings IF THIS (above) IS MISSING IS NOT POSSIBLE TO RETURN TO A NORMAL LIFE EXAMPLE OF THE SPIDER WEB (social relationship) similar to what happen with the district six and the destruction of social relationships